clinical sciences time-compressed speech test in … · time-compressed speech test in brazilian...

261

CLINICS 2007;62(3):261-72

CLINICAL SCIENCES

TIME-COMPRESSED SPEECH TEST IN BRAZILIANPORTUGUESE

Camila Maia Rabelo, Eliane Schochat

Rabelo CM, Schochat E. Time-compressed speech test in brazilian portuguese. Clinics. 2007;62(3):261-72.

INTRODUCTION: The time-compressed speech test has existed since the 1970s. It is sensitive for evaluating auditory closure.However, it is not used in Brazil because until recently, it had not been developed in Portuguese.PURPOSE: To develop a compressed speech test in Portuguese, to apply it to normal-hearing adults, and to verify which of thecompressed lists (50%, 60%, or 70%) is the most appropriate to be part of a set of auditory processing tests.METHODS: 144 normal-hearing adults, distributed homogeneously between both genders, were assessed. The compressedspeech tests were applied using monosyllables and disyllables according to 8 previously established sequences, and the resultswere compared with respect to the initial ear, to the order of presentation, and to the kind of test.RESULTS: There were no significant differences between ears. The 50%, 60% and 70% presentation order produced a betteraverage of correct responses than the 70%, 60% and 50% one. There was a significant difference (P <.001) between the results ofthe tests comprising lists of monosyllables compared to those comprising disyllables. In both tests (with monosyllables anddisyllables) the average of correct responses decreased as the compression increased.CONCLUSION: The monosyllabic and disyllabic lists with 60% compression appeared to be more stable than the others, withthe average of correct responses around 90%.

KEYWORDS: Speech perception. Hearing tests. Speech discrimination tests. Speech intelligibility.

INTRODUCTION

The communication process among individuals happensmore efficiently when the individual who speaks is able toexpress himself adequately, and the one who hears is ableto understand what is being said.

In the hearing and decoding process of what is beingsaid, an interrelation between the integrity of the periphe-ral auditory system (“the hearing”) and the central audi-tory system (“the decoding”) is observed. The abilities toprocess the hearing information, the auditory processingabilities, have been observed to be very important for ef-fective communication.

Auditory processing studies explore the abilities in-volved in the interpretation of the sound stimulus and theinvolvement of several mechanisms of the auditory systemthat are responsible for processing verbal and nonverbalstimuli.1

In 1992, Stecker reported that audiologists have devel-oped unique methods for the evaluation of auditory proces-sing disorders, such that the auditory system functioningmay be evaluated in an adequately controlled environmentwith careful use of the desired stimulus.2

Nowadays, there is a great variety of tests for the evalu-ation of the auditory processing. However, it is difficult todetermine which test should be applied in order to obtaina conclusive diagnosis. In the evaluation of the auditoryprocessing, both monotic and dichotic tests are used.3

In the international literature, the most frequently usedmonotic test is the time-compressed speech test. This testis part of a set of tests called low redundancy monauralspeech tests that evaluate the closure ability. Auditory clo-

Physiotherapy, Audiology, and Occupational Therapy, Faculty of Medicine,University of São Paulo - São Paulo/SP, Brazil.Email: [email protected] for publication on December 01, 2006.Accepted for publication on January 02, 2007.

262

CLINICS 2007;62(3):261-72Time-compressed speech test in Brazilian PortugueseRabelo CM et al

sure is the ability to recognize the whole (words or mes-sages) when there are omitted parts.4

The first studies are from 1957, when Callearo andLazaroni studied speech intelligibility as affected by speechrate. Their research showed that redundancy of superiorstructures and of speech message information allows an al-most total neutralization of the negative effect of increasesin speech rate when such increases remain within modestlimits. For greater rate increases, they found the need foran intensity increase in order to attain good discrimination.5

Compression methods for the performance of compressedspeech tests began to appear in the 1970s. The first one wasdeveloped by Beasley et al in 1972, using Northwestern Uni-versity Auditory Test number 6 word lists (NU-6), whichwere compressed by the electro-mechanic time compressionmethod.3,6,7 The original stimulus was submitted to a numberof compressions proportional to an area from 0% to 70%,at 10% intervals. It is worth noting that there are other meth-ods for the modification of the speech rate: the rate can beincreased or decreased by an alteration in the speaker’sspeech pattern (articulation pattern) or by recording altera-tion (analogical or digital). Also, a method used for speechrate increase is to remove portions of the sound wave throughan electro-mechanic device, and then gather the resultingsegments, presenting them at a normal speed; this acceler-ates the speech sample.

Since then, the compressed speech material has beenused clinically in the evaluation of the speech recognitioneither in patients with auditory processing disorders or inpatients with neurological deficits.8

In 2000, Baran and Musiek reported that the com-pressed speech test had been extensively used in the evalu-ation of individuals with central auditory nervous system(CANS) pathologies. The compressed speech test stimuliare generally degraded by digital or electro-acoustic modi-fications of the signal’s frequency parameters, time, or in-tensity characteristics.9

Results of research with compressed speech show thatthe intelligibility is lower when the degree of compressionof the stimulus increases. In lower compression bands, 45%or 50%, the intelligibility is greater and therefore, these areassociated with a greater number of correct responses. Asthe degree of compression increases, the degree of intelli-gibility decreases proportionally.7,10,11

The compression degrees is the most influencing vari-able on intelligibility. In English, normal speech may re-tain a satisfactory intelligibility degree even when it is com-pressed to a point where it is reproduced with 60% of thenormal presentation time. It was concluded that in English,the performance fall was gradual with the increase of thecompression from 0% to 60%, and that the number of re-

peated words by segment was, on average, statistically thesame for all speeds. At the 60% compression level, intelli-gibility of words is satisfactory, and the average of correctresponses is stable; however, with an increase of compres-sion to 70%, there is a sudden fall in the average numberof correct responses of individuals, showing that stimulihaving a 70% compression are difficult to identify, evenfor normal individuals.7,12–14 The average for correct re-sponses for each ear considered in the evaluation of Ameri-cans is around 82%. Lower scores are considered atypicalfor adults.7

Some research has been carried out in other languagesto determine what individual responses would be like indifferent languages. Research with bilingual individualsshowed different when Spanish was compared with Catalan,in contrast to what was found when French was comparedwith English (languages with different representation). Inthe study comparing Spanish and Catalan, results showedthat the compressed speech in Catalan or in Spanish maybe used for training, and that it improves performance inboth languages; however, the comparative study betweenFrench and English showed that bilingual individuals didnot benefit from hearing the test in English when they weretested in French and vice-versa; the difference between thetwo languages does not cause the presentation of one testto influence the performance in the other.15

Research with several compression levels has shownthat individuals may learn to better understand stimuli withmodified speech speed if they are trained to hear this way.Auditory closure ability can be developed and improvedthrough auditory training, and presentation of compressedspeech with lower compression degrees before the higherones may improve the understanding of modified stimuli,and consequently the average number of correct responsesobtained.15–18

It is also possible to observe an improvement in the per-formance of the second ear tested in relation to the firstone, which could be explained by the learning of the taskthrough the previous experience of the first ear tested. Inthe easier condition, individuals use more acoustic cluesthan in the harder condition; in the harder condition, audi-tory processing prevails in the auditory closure ability. De-creasing the redundancy makes the compressed speech testsbecome appropriate for the evaluation of auditory clo-sure.19,20

For speech test design, several criteria should be takeninto account. In 2002, Mackersie reported that the sensi-tivity and specificity of the test may be affected by a se-ries of factors, and some of them are under the control ofthe audiologist. One of them is the digital recording of thespeech material. Another factor that can improve the reli-

263

CLINICS 2007;62(3):261-72 Time-compressed speech test in Brazilian PortugueseRabelo CM et al

ability of the test is increasing the number of items (words).However, this can cause an increase in evaluation time, andtherefore researchers have chosen to use monosyllables.21

Other influencing factors are the linguistic characteristicsof the stimuli and the acoustic clues present in the com-pressed stimulus22,23 as well as the patient’s motivation torespond to the test, because the tests should not be too easyor too difficult to the point ceasing to challenge the brain.24

The purpose of this study was to elaborate a compressedspeech test in Brazilian Portuguese and to apply it to nor-mal-hearing adults. Additionally, an aim of this study wasto determine among all lists of words obtained in the 3 com-pression levels studied (50%, 60%, and 70%), which wouldbe the most appropriate ones to be included in the set of testsused to evaluate the auditory processing in clinical practice.

The study was performed with adults because they areat an ideal age regarding the maturation of the central au-ditory nervous system. McPherson (1996) stated that frombirth to maturity there are several effects that influence thematuration of auditory pathways that could be observedthrough the evoked auditory potentials.25

A rationale for this study was the lack of a test with Bra-zilian Portuguese verbal stimuli to evaluate auditory closureability using the stimulus duration as the degraded parameter.The current battery of tests available in Brazilian Portuguesecomprises 2 tests that evaluate this same ability, but onefunctions through a modification in the stimulus intensity pa-rameters—the speech in noise test—and the other througha modification in the stimulus frequency—the filtered speechtest.

Therefore, it is expected that this test could be initiallynormalized for our population (adults, in this case), and forchildren of several age groups in the future; it is also ex-pected that it may complement the current battery of evalu-ation tests of auditory processing of patients who presentsome kind of disorder in this ability.

PURPOSE

The purposes of this research were:1) To elaborate a compressed speech test at 50%, 60%,

and 70% compression in Brazilian Portuguese and to ap-ply it to normal-hearing adults. 2) To verify which mono-syllabic or disyllabic word list with stimuli time-com-pressed by 50%, 60%, and 70% is the most appropriate forevaluating the auditory processing.

METHODS

This study was submitted to and approved by the Re-search Analysis Ethical Commission of the Hospital das

Clínicas of the University of São Paulo Medical School.A sample dimensioning study was performed in the

Applied Statistical Center, CEA, of the University of SãoPaulo Institute of Mathematics and Statistics. This studyshowed that the sample should include of 144 individuals.

Accordingly, 144 individuals were evaluated, dividedinto 2 groups: 72 women and 72 men, ranging in age from16 to 33 years. Individuals less than 16 years of age werenot included, because they were considered immature fromthe neurological point of view, and also individuals olderthan 33 years old were not included because from the neu-rological point of view, at this point the aging process hasalready started. The maximum age initially established was30 years, but due to the difficulty in completing the malesample, the age group was extended 3 years for bothgroups.

All individuals participated voluntarily, and they had allfinished at least secondary school. All signed the InformedConsent Term before the beginning of data collection.

The criteria for the individual selection were as follows:a) age from 16 through 33 years; b) no clinical history ofotological or auditory processing, c) basic audiologicalevaluation (audiometry, speech audiometry, and immittancemeasures) within normal parameters26; d) auditory proces-sing screening within normality.27

In the process of patient selection, no IQ tests were per-formed, nor was the socioeconomic level considered, sinceaccording to Almeida et al, there is no significant differ-ence between individuals of different socioeconomic lev-els; the differences occur as a result of the different stimu-lation levels received by the individuals during their child-hood. In the case of adults, who have already been throughthis phase, the socioeconomic level no longer influencesthe performance of auditory processing tests.28

The following evaluations were performed: immittancemeasures, tonal audiometry, speech reception threshold(SRT), and word recognition score (WRS), using the pa-rameters established by Mangabeira Albernaz et al in 198129

to assure the integrity of the peripheral system.From the data obtained with this set of tests, individu-

als presenting normal results were selected for the admin-istration of the compressed speech test, which was per-formed in an acoustic cabin.

The compressed speech test that we developed com-prised 50 words that were compressed by the electro-me-chanical time compression method. The original stimulus,6 lists with 50 monosyllables and 6 lists with 50 disylla-bles each (Annex 1), was digitally recorded on a compactdisc (CD) in the radio and TV studio of the University ofSão Paulo Arts and Communication School, at a normalrate; then, the lists underwent compressions varying from

264


50% to 70% at intervals of 10%; thus, 2 monosyllabic and2 disyllabic lists underwent 50% compression, 2 underwent60% compression, and 2 underwent 70% compression.Each list lasted approximately 5 minutes, and the totalevaluation lasted approximately 1½ hours. Based on thefindings of Musiek et al in 1993, the stimulus was presentedmonaurally at 40 dB above the speech threshold (SRT)7

through a CD player connected to a 2-channel audiometer(GSI – 61), and the participant was asked to repeat whathe heard. Participants were also always encouraged to re-spond, even when they were not sure of the answer. Be-cause all participants were adults, they were told in the be-ginning of the evaluation that they could interrupt the testwhen feeling tired or when they felt they were losing at-tention. First, words were presented through an earphone(TDH – 41) in each ear for each compression level and typeof stimulus (monosyllable or disyllable), and the percent-age of correct responses for each ear was recorded accord-ing to a specific protocol, as was the repeated word, evenwhen it was not correct. According to the American stand-ardization, normal results are declared when scores areabove 82% for each ear.7

The performance of the right ear was compared to theperformance of the left ear at the different compression lev-els (50%, 60%, and 70%) and for the 2 types of word lists(monosyllable and disyllable).

The ANOVA parametric test was used for the statisti-cal analysis.

The confidence interval established for the data analy-sis was 95%, with the significance level (P) at 0.05 (5%).Results were described according to the average of correctresponses, median, standard deviation, and P < .05.

In order to avoid possible bias and to determine if therewas a difference in beginning the test in each situation, itwas decided that each participant would begin the test witha certain ear, a certain stimulus type (monosyllable or di-

syllable), and by a certain presentation order (increasingor decreasing).

RESULTS

Two CDs for the compressed speech tests were pro-duced, one with monosyllabic words and another with di-syllabic words. Each CD had 7 tracks, the first with a cali-bration tone, and the other ones with the lists of words hav-ing undergone compressions of 50%, 60%, and 70%. Ex-amples of the spectrograms of the monosyllabic word“chão” at the different compressions are seen in Figure 1.

One hundred and forty four individuals were evaluated,72 men and 72 women. The mean age of these individualswas 24 years (women 22.4 years; men 25.7 years).

The first comparison made was among the averages ofcorrect responses between the ears, right (RE) and left (LE),at the 3 compression levels studied, 50%, 60%, and 70%,for each type of test: compressed speech test with mono-syllables (TFC-Mono) and compressed speech test with di-syllables (TFC-Bis). No significant difference between theaverages of correct responses of the right and left ears atany compression level for either the monosyllable or di-syllable list was found (Table 1).

Therefore, and because the ear effect was not signifi-cant, these data were combined to double the sample size,and consequently to produce results of higher power.

The number of correct responses among the compres-sion levels for the disyllable list was significantly differ-ent (P < .001) from that that for the monosyllable list (Ta-ble 2). In all comparisons, the condition with greater com-pression produced a lower average of correct responses thanthe condition with lower compression.

The list with lowest average of correct responses (there-fore the most difficult one) was the disyllable list that un-derwent a 70% compression, and the list with highest av-

Table 1 - Comparison by ANOVA of the results obtained with the right and left ears for the monosyllable and bisyllabletests at the 3 compression conditions

Monosyllable 50% 60% 70%

Right Left Right Left Right Left

Average(%) 45.3 (90.6%) 45 (90.0%) 44.1 (88.2) 44 (88.0%) 41.4 (82.8%) 41.2 (82.4%)Median 46 45 44 44 41 41.5SD 2.26 2.85 2.45 2.73 3.46 3.53Sample Size 144 144 144 144 144 144P .293 .803 .511

BisyllableAverage(%) 47.4 (94.8%) 47.2 (94.4%) 46.2 (92.4%) 45.9 (91.8%) 34.4 (68.8%) 34 (68.0%)Median 48 48 46.5 46.5 35 34SD (standard deviation) 1.90 1.95 2.35 2.64 5.44 5.57SampleSize 144 144 144 144 144 144P .392 .278 .593

265


erage of correct responses was the disyllable list that un-derwent a 50% compression.

At the end of all evaluations, no lack of patient atten-tion was observed, so patient attention appeared not to bea contributing factor to a reduced number of correct res-ponses.

DISCUSSION

Our findings that there was no significant differencebetween the ears in either test, agree with those of Baranand Musiek.9 This result was expected, because it is knownthat although the left hemisphere is preferential for lan-guage, the reception of a monotic stimulation, such as thecompressed speech test, causes the activation of the ipsi-

and contralateral pathways of the auditory nervous system;this neutralizes the preference of the right ear relative tothe left one and provides a similar performance betweenboth ears. Monotic tests are useful for detecting auditorypathway disorders, but not to locate them, because of theparticipation of the ipsi- and the contralateral pathways,resulting in a similar performance of the right and the leftears in those tests.9

Another studied aspect was the patients’ performanceaccording the word lists and the compression conditionsapplied.

Regarding the monosyllable and disyllable word lists,the disyllable list with 50% and 60% time-compressionshowed a better average (although not tested statistically)of correct responses than the monosyllable lists under the

Figure 1 - Spectogram of the monosyllable “chão” (without compression; with 50%; 60% and 70% compression).

266


same compression conditions. Therefore, disyllables ap-peared to be easier to interpret. However, under the 70%time-compression condition, the inverse occurred, ie, themonosyllables appeared to be easier than the disyllablesto interpret.

We had predicted that the test with monosyllables wouldbe more difficult than the test with disyllables. That is be-cause we thought that compression would cause the mono-syllables, which are short words, to be less intelligible. How-ever, the universe of Brazilian Portuguese monosyllabicwords is more restricted than that of the disyllabic ones,which apparently allowed this test to be easier than the di-syllable test at the 70% time-compression level, since afterthe distortion caused by the compression disyllabic wordsproduced other words, making intelligibility difficult.

This finding could also be due to the fact that mono-syllables present fewer consonantal clusters, and therefore,the chance of the average of correct responses is more el-evated. After the compression, the consonantal clusters ofthe disyllables practically disappeared. This originated sev-eral possibilities for other words, which may have increasedthe number of mistakes in the disyllable lists.

The decrease in intelligibility, or in the ability for audi-tory closure, that occurs the compressed speech tests is dueto the loss of phonologic information that makes differentwords, in addition to compromising their intelligibility. 15,22

A preference for the use of monosyllables was found inthe reviewed literature8,21 Monosyllable tests were preferredespecially in clinical practice, because they are simple toadminister, requiring little time, and because they are basedon extensive normative data, especially in English. Further-more, they are less redundant, which somehow minimizesthe lexical and semantic influence. This influence is a fac-tor that should be taken into account mainly in the speechtests, because despite the phonemic discrimination beingdeterminant in this type of test, the cognitive and linguisticaspects cannot be disregarded, nor should the acoustic char-acteristics of words and their access to the mental lexical inthe performance of individuals in the test. 21

The design of a test with words requires some consid-eration, such as including words that are part of the vo-

cabulary of the majority of the population, a broad distri-bution of phonemes, and easily understood words withequal intelligibility. Another concern is with the materialrecording, so that the sound quality is adequate and not an-other factor to prejudice the intelligibility. It is conceded,then, that even though the intent is for great control overthe factors that interfere in the message, the lists are hardlyperfect and not quite ideal. 21

For the design of the time-compressed speech test andbased on the literature on tests with words, we used bal-anced lists with words that are broadly used in audiologi-cal tests in order to present good quality after compression.

Our analysis was chosen in order to determine whichlist would be more appropriate for further use in the evalu-ation of auditory processing in clinical practice. Accord-ingly, based on our comparisons, it would be possible tofind which of the 6 lists would be the better one to applyin evaluation of patients with suspicion of auditory proces-sing disorders, without being too easy or too difficult. Thus,the aim was to obtain a list with good sensitivity andspecificity to be used in evaluations.

In both compressed speech tests, those with monosyl-lables and with disyllables, the intelligibility was higherin the less compressed lists and lower in the more com-pressed ones.

Some degrees of compression are really more intelligi-ble than others, since less compression, (such as 50%), doesnot notably compromise intelligibility. Under these condi-tions, the messages (words) still have supplementary infor-mation that increases the intelligibility and facilitates therecognition of words.16

The average number of correct responses was lowest forthe disyllable list with a 70% time-compression. Some fac-tors collaborated for the lower intelligibility in the 70% time-compression, and among them was the fact that the indi-vidual has to form, test, and reject several hypotheses in thesearch for the correct word, which is in agreement with thefindings of Friedman and Johnson;10 additionally, participantshave to be more alert and vigilant during the evaluation, sincethe most compressed lists present increased distortion anddecreased redundancy. Katz and Wilde (1985),12 also reported

Table 2 - Comparison by ANOVA between the averages of correct responses for the word lists (monosyllable and bisyllable)at the 3 compression levels

Lists Mono-50 Mono-60 Mono-70 Bis-50 Bis-60 Bis-70

Average (%) 45.1(90.2%) 44 (88.0%) 41.3 (82.6%) 47.3(94.6%) 46 (92.0%) 34.2 (68.4%)Median 46 44 41 48 46 35SD 2.57 2.59 3.49 1.92 2.50 5.50Sample Size 288 288 288 288 288 288p-value < 0.001*

statistically significant

267


this finding in their study. It was also found in the compari-son between the differences in the averages of correct re-sponses of the monosyllable and disyllable lists in each com-pression degree, that the greater difference was between thelists of words with 70% compression.

The list with highest average of correct responses wasthe disyllable list with 50% time-compression, which wasthus the easiest list and the one with the highest degree ofintelligibility.

Therefore, the results obtained in this study are similarto those found in the literature,7,13,14,17 that report decreasedintelligibility with the increase of time-compression, agradual fall of the averages of correct responses at com-pression levels until the 60% level, and lower averages ofcorrect responses at 70% time-compression.

In auditory training programs, the average of correct re-sponses should be between 30% and 70% to maintain thepatient’s motivation, ie, so that the test is not too easy nortoo difficult to the point of not maintaining a challenge tothe brain.24

Based on the findings of the study, the most stable listwas the one with 60% compression for both types ofstimuli, because at this compression level, the average ofcorrect responses was around 90%, and it resulted in thelowest standard deviation, denoting stability in the results.

These findings agree with those in the literature,7,13

where the average of correct response in the most stablecompressions was reported to be around 82% in normalhearing adults.

Thus, we conclude that the 60% time compression, ei-ther with mono- or disyllable lists, is the most adequatecondition to be used in the future in evaluations of audi-tory processing in adults, because it presented an averageof correct responses above the average obtained at the 70%time-compression level, and it produced less variability than50% time compression.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of data analysis showed that it was possi-ble to design two CDs, one with the compressed speechtest with monosyllabic words and another one with disyl-labic words in Brazilian Portuguese, with compressions of50%, 60%, and 70%. In the comparison between the mono-syllable and disyllable lists, and between the compressionconditions, it can be concluded that the most stable list wasthe 60% compression one for both types of stimuli, becauseat this time-compression level, the average of correct re-sponse was around 90% and the variability was lowest.There was no significant difference between the perform-ance of the right ear or the left ear for the time-compressedspeech test with monosyllables (TFC-M), or for the time-compressed speech test with disyllables (TFC-D).

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This study was supported by FAPESP.

RESUMO

Rabelo CM, Schochat E. Teste de fala comprimida emportuguês. Clinics. 2007;62(3):261-72.

INTRODUÇÃO: O teste de fala comprimida existe há maisde 30 anos, é sensível para avaliar o fechamento auditivo,porém não é usado no Brasil, já que, até os dias de hoje, aindanão havia sido desenvolvido para o português do Brasil.OBJETIVOS: Elaborar um teste de fala comprimida emportuguês e aplicá-lo em adultos normo-ouvintes, verificarqual das listas comprimidas (50, 60 e 70%) é a mais apropriadapara integrar o grupo de testes de Processamento Auditivo.

MÉTODOS: Foram avaliados 144 indivíduos adultos,distribuídos homogeneamente entre os gêneros masculinoe feminino. Foram aplicados os testes de fala comprimidacom monossílabos e dissílabos, de acordo com oitoseqüências previamente estabelecidas para em seguidacomparar os resultados de acordo com a orelha inicial,ordem de apresentação e tipo de teste.RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença estatisticamentesignificante entre as orelhas, a ordem crescente deapresentação mostrou uma média de acertos melhor que adecrescente, os testes com monossílabos apresentaram

268


maior média de acertos que os dissílabos e em ambos ostestes (com monossílabos e com dissílabos) a média deacertos diminui com o aumento da compressão.CONCLUSÃO: As listas de monossílabos e dissílabos comcompressão de 60% mostraram-se mais estáveis que as

outras, com média de acerto em torno de 90%.

UNITERMOS: Percepção de fala; Testes auditivos; Tes-tes de discriminação da fala; Inteligibilidade da fala.

REFERENCES

1. Jerger J, Musiek FE. Report of the Consensus Conference on thediagnosis of auditory processing disorders in school-aged children. JAm Acad Audiol. 2000;11:467-74.

2. Stecker NA. Central auditory processing: implications in audiology. In:Katz J, Stecker NA, Henderson D. Central auditory processing: atransdisciplinary view. St. Louis: Mosby Year Book; 1992; p. 117. 27.

3. Schochat E. Processamento auditivo: revisão de literatura. Rev. Bras.Atual. Otorrinolaringol. 1998;5: 24-31.

4. Rees NS. Saying more than know: Is auditory processing disorder ameaningful concept? In: Keith RW. Central Auditory anda languagedisorders in children. Softcover ed., California, College-Hill Press; 1982;p. 94-120.

5. Calearo C, Lazzaroni A speech intelligibility in relation to the speed ofmessage. Laryngoscope. 1957;67:410-9.

6. Beasley D, Schwimmer S, Rintelmann W. Intelligibilty of time-compressed CNC monosyllables. J Speech Hear Res. 1972;15:340-50.

7. Musiek FE, Baran JA, Pinheiro ML. Neuroaudiology: case studies. SanDiego: Singular; 1993; p. 7-28: Behavioral and electrophysiologicaltest procedures.

8. Mueller HG. Monosyllabic procedures. In: Katz J. Handbook of clinicalaudiology. 3rd. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins; 1985; p. 355-82.

9. Baran JA, Musiek FE. Avaliação comportamental do sistema nervosoauditivo central. In: Musiek, FE; Rintelmann, WF. Perspectivas atuaisem avaliação auditiva. São Paulo: Manole; 2000; p. 371-409.

10. Friedman HL, Johnson RL. Compressed speech: correlates of listeningability. J Commun. 1968;18:205-18.

11. Wingfield A, Nolan KA. Spontaneous segmentation in normal and intime compressed speech. Percept Psychophys. 1980;28:97-102.

12. Katz J, Wilde L. Auditory perceptual disorders in children. In: Katz J.Handbook of clinical audiology. 3rd. Baltimore: Williams & Wilkins;1985; p. 664-88.

13. Wilson, RH, Peece, JP, Salamon, DL, Sperry, JL, Bornstein, SP. Effectsof time compression plus reverberation on the intelligibility ofNorthwestern University auditory test no. 6. J Am Acad Audiol.1994;5:269-77.

14. Humes, LE. Do “auditory processing” tests measure auditory processingin the elderly? Ear and Hearing. 2005;26;109-19.

15. Pallier C, Sebastian-Gallés N, Dupoux E, Christophe A, Mehler J.Perceptual adjustment to time-compressed speech: a cross-linguisticstudy. Mem Cognit. 1998;26: 844-51.

16. Orr DB. Time compressed speech - a perspective. J Commun.1968;18:288-92.

17. Beasley DS, Maki JE, Orchik DJ. Children’s perception of time-compressed speech on two measures of speech discrimination. J SpeechHear Disord. 1976;41:216-25.

18. Wilson RH, Bell TS, Koslowski JA. Learning effects associated withrepeated word-recognition measures using sentence material. J RehabilRes Dev. 2003;40 :329-36.

269


Name:Age: Date:

Compressed speech test (monosyllables)List 01 and list 02 – 50% compression

List – 01 (50%) List – 02 (50%) List – 01(50%) List – 02(50%)

Right Left Right Left

01 BOM PÉ 26 PÉ MEU02 PÓ TEU 27 BEM TOM03 DÓ CAL 28 DAR QUAL04 TÃO BAR 29 TEU BOI05 QUEM DOM 30 QUER DEU06 GOL GÁS 31 GÁS GOL07 FUI FIZ 32 FÉ FAZ08 SOL CHÁ 33 VOU SAL09 ZÉ SOL 34 SIM CHÃO10 CRUZ VOZ 35 CRER MAR11 RIM ZÁS 36 BIS NEM12 NÃO GIZ 37 DOR GIM13 MEU MÃO 38 JUZ LER14 JÁ NÓ 39 RÉU RÃ15 SUL NHÁ 40 LUA CRER16 COR LAR 41 SOM GEL17 PUS LHA 42 NEM VÉU18 BAR RIR 43 MEL JUZ19 TREM BRIM 44 ZÁS JÁ20 LÃ GRÃO 45 CHÃO VAI21 ROL POR 46 RIR LUZ22 QUIS DOR 47 LEI FEL23 NU PÃO 48 FIM FLOR24 CÉU BEM 49 TER CÁ25 VI CÃO 50 VOZ TIL

Score %

Score:Right =Left =

19. Schochat E. Percepção de fala: presbiacusia e perda auditiva induzidapelo ruído [tese]. São Paulo: Faculdade de Filosofia, Letras e CiênciasHumana, Universidade de São Paulo; 1994.

20. Chermak, GD, Musiek, FE. Central auditory processing disorders: newperspectives. San Diego: Singular Publishing Group, Inc; 1997; p. 109-27: Behavioral central auditory tests.

21. MacKersie CL. Tests of speech perception abilities. Curr OpinOtolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2002;10(5):392 -7.

22. Sebastián-Gallés N, Dupoux E, Costa A, Mehler J. Adaptation to time-compressed speech: phonological determinants. Percept Psychophys.2000;62:834-42.

23. Gordon - Salant S, Fitzbbons PJ. Sources of age-related recognitiondifficulty for time-compressed speech. J Speech Lang Hear Res.2001;44:709-19.

24. Musiek FE, Schochat E. Auditory training and central auditoryprocessing disorders - a case study. Semin Hearing. 1998;19:357-66.

25. McPherson DL. Late potencials of the auditory system. London:Singular; 1996. p.75-100: Clinical aplication of the long latency auditoryevoked potencials.

26. American national standards institute. American national standardsspecifications for audiometers. New York: ANSI; S 3.6, 1969.

27. Pereira LD. Processamento auditivo central: abordagem passo a passo.In: Pereira LD, Schochat E. Processamento auditivo central - manualde avaliação. São Paulo: Editora Lovise; 1997; p. 49-60.

28. Almeida CC, Lopes CC, Macedo LM, Gadel MT, Costa MC, PereiraLD. Influência do nivel sócio-econômico e cultural e da estimulaçãoauditiva nas habilidades do processamento auditivo . Fono Atual. 1997:1:12.17.

29. Mangabeira-Albernaz P, Mangabeira-Albernaz PL, Mangabeira-Albernaz LG, Mangabeira-Albernaz PF. Otorrinolaringologia prática.10a. São Paulo: Sarvier; 1981.

30. Santos TM, Russo IP. A prática da audiologia clínica. São Paulo: Cortez;1986; p. 73-88: Logoaudiometria.

270


List 05 and list 06 – 70% compression



01 RIO PÁ 26 VOZ PÉ02 FIO TOM 27 GOL TEU03 LHA COR 28 CHÁ MEL04 LAR GÁZ 29 NHÔ BAR05 CHÃO FIZ 30 JÁ GIM06 TRAZ SOL 31 NÃO GOL07 GÁZ CHÁ 32 TOM FIO08 CAL VOZ 33 LER SAL09 VOU VÃO 34 PAU CHÃO10 NEM ZÁS 35 DAR VOU11 DOM JÁ 36 ZÁS GIZ12 GIZ MAL 37 TIA ZÉ13 CÃO NÃO 38 GRAU MAR14 GRÃO NHÔ 39 DIA NÓS15 NÓS LER 40 LHE NHÁ16 SAL LHE 41 TAL LAR17 MEL RÉU 42 PÁ LHA18 TEU TRÊS 43 GIM RIO19 BAR GRAU 44 VÃO TRAZ20 ZÉ TIA 45 FIZ GRÃO21 MAR CAL 46 COR POR22 POR DIA 47 MAL DOM23 CÉU PAU 48 RÉU NEM24 NHÁ TAL 49 TRÊS CÃO25 PÉ DAR 50 SOL CÉU

Score %

Score:Right =Left =




01 PÁ COR 26 PAI FIO02 TOM LHE 27 MAR DOR03 COR JÁ 28 QUE TIL04 BOM ZÁS 29 BIS VOU05 FIZ NHÔ 30 DAR LHA06 GÁS TIA 31 GIZ MAR07 FIO CHÁ 32 FAZ VAI08 CHÁ TAL 33 SEU POR09 SIM NÃO 34 CHÃO NÓS10 VÃO MAL 35 MIM DOM11 ZÁS FIZ 36 NÃO NEM12 JÁ LER 37 RUM TEU13 MAL CAL 38 LUA GIZ14 SOL DIA 39 RIR NHA15 NHÔ VÃO 40 CRU RIO16 LER SOL 41 GRÃO PÉ17 LHE TRÊS 42 CÉU TRAZ18 RÉU PAU 43 MÊS SAL19 TRÊS PÁ 44 JUZ CÉU20 GRAU RÉU 45 VEM CHÃO21 TIA GÁZ 46 LAR LAR22 CAL DAR 47 MEL BAR23 DIA GRAU 48 DOR ZÉ24 PAU TOM 49 CÃO CÃO25 TAL VOZ 50 TEU GRÃO

Score %

Score:Right =Left =

271



List – 03 (60%) List – 04 (60%) List – 03 (60%) List – 04(60%)


01 BRAÇO PATO 26 PATO BRAÇO02 CASA TELA 27 TELA CASA03 DISCO CAMA 28 CAMA DISCO04 FACA BOLA 29 BOLA FACA05 JARRA DATA 30 DATA JARRA06 PAGO GOTA 31 GOTA PAGO07 TETO FONTE 32 FONTE TETO08 RODA CHEIO 33 CHEIO RODA09 CEDO SANTO 34 SANTO CEDO10 QUILO VALSA 35 VALSA QUILO11 LAÇO ZEBRA 36 ZEBRA LAÇO12 BRILHO GEMA 37 GEMA BRILHO13 NADA MALA 38 MALA NADA14 LINHA NARIZ 39 NARIZ LINHA15 MOLA MANHÃ 40 MANHÃ MOLA16 CAMPO LAGO 41 LAGO CAMPO17 TOMBO CALHA 42 CALHA TOMBO18 DROGA CARO 43 CARO DROGA19 SALTO FAROL 44 FAROL SALTO20 LENÇO GRITO 45 GRITO LENÇO21 CHAVE PLACA 46 PLACA CHAVE22 CRAVO VIDRO 47 VIDRO CRAVO23 VIDA BRANCO 48 BRANCO VIDA24 NUVEM BLUSA 49 BLUSA NUVEM25 ZELO FLAUTA 50 FLAUTA ZELO

Score %

Score:Right =Left =

Name:Age: Date:

Compressed speech test (bisyllables)List 01 and list 02 – 50% compression



01 PANO BAILE 26 BAILE PANO02 TINTA CARA 27 CARA TINTA03 CORTE DONO 28 DONO CORTE04 BICHO GRITO 29 GRITO BICHO05 DENTE PAPO 30 PAPO DENTE06 GOLE CANTO 31 CANTO GOLE07 FERRO CHEFE 32 CHEFE FERRO08 CINCO SOLA 33 SOLA CINCO09 CHINA CARRO 34 CARRO CHINA10 MARCA GELO 35 GELO MARCA11 NOSSA POUCO 36 POUCO NOSSA12 BANHO REDE 37 REDE BANHO13 ROLHA LOGO 38 LOGO ROLHA14 RATO NEGRO 39 NEGRO RATO15 CREDO SONHO 40 SONHO CREDO16 GRADE MODA 41 MODA GRADE17 PRIMO FILHO 42 FILHO PRIMO18 ASA CHIFRE 43 CHIFRE ASA19 GENTE LIVRE 44 LIVRE GENTE20 VIDRO GATO 45 GATO VIDRO21 LAÇO JOVEM 46 JOVEM LAÇO22 ALTO NUNCA 47 NUNCA ALTO23 CLARO TRAÇO 48 TRAÇO CLARO24 TIGRE ZONA 49 ZONA TIGRE25 TOMBO VOLTA 50 VOLTA TOMBO

Score %

Score:Right =Left =

272





1 POSTE PADRE 26 PADRE POSTE02 TOCA TONTO 27 TONTO TOCA03 COLA QUERO 28 QUERO COLA04 VIDA BOTA 29 BOTA VIDA05 DAMA DADO 30 DADO DAMA06 MANHÃ GOLA 31 GOLA MANHÃ07 FITA FURO 32 FURO FITA08 CHUVA SANTO 33 SANTO CHUVA09 CENTO MARCHA 34 MARCHA CENTO10 VENTO MUNDO 35 MUNDO VENTO11 ZONA NEVE 36 NEVE ZONA12 GELO SENHA 37 SENHA GELO13 MATA CALHA 38 CALHA MATA14 NINHO RISO 39 RISO NINHO15 MINHA CRIA 40 CRIA MINHA16 LOGO GROSSO 41 GROSSO LOGO17 MALHA CHAVE 42 CHAVE MALHA18 FAROL ZANGA 43 ZANGA FAROL19 PRETO JOVEM 44 JOVEM PRETO20 GRAMA VELA 45 VELA GRAMA21 BLOCO LAGO 46 LAGO BLOCO22 CLASSE SALTO 47 SALTO CLASSE23 DRAMA CLERO 48 CLERO DRAMA24 PLANO MAGRO 49 MAGRO PLANO25 TRAVA TANGO 50 TANGO TRAVA

Score %

Score:Right =Left =

clinical sciences time-compressed speech test in … · time-compressed speech test in brazilian...

Documents